To a defamation claim brought here against it and State-owned media entities by New York-based Guyanese political commentator—Rickford Burke—who is seeking more than $500m in damages, the government’s contention is that the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the case.
This, among other things, are the averments being made by Minister of Governance and Parliamentary Affairs, Gail Teixeira, in her defence filed on Tuesday to the multimillion-dollar claim levelled against the State and its news agencies.
Apart from Teixeira, the other Defendants listed in the claim are the Attorney General, National Communications Network (NCN) and the Guyana National Newspapers Limited, publishers of the Guyana Chronicle.
She says not only is the Court without jurisdiction to hear the case, but that the claim itself could not properly constitute a claim in law as it has not been signed by an attorney “or anyone else nor dated.”
According to Teixeira, she is “entitled as a public official, Member of Parliament and Minister of Government to speak on matters of public interest and importance,” while adding that the matters on which she spoke were of such nature for which the public was entitled to be aware.
Calling the claim “baseless,” Teixeira expressed the view that the entire claim should be thrown out.
In his claim filed back in December of last year, Burke said that Teixeira in October had made certain “derogatory” statements about him in press statements which had been published in the Chronicle and aired on NCN.
Describing himself in his statement of claim (SoC) as a “well-respected human rights activist…and prominent figure within the Guyanese diaspora,” Burke (the Claimant) said that Teixeira accused him of “spread[ing] racist propaganda.”
He said that from the content of the press statements which were exhibited in his claim, Teixeira sought to label him as “dishonest and untrustworthy,” and “a criminal;” all of which he said are false.
“The statements have no basis in fact, are malicious grossly inaccurate and intended to deceive the public,” Burke said.
He then went on to state that his personal and professional reputation and standing have been “irreparably and severely damaged,” while his reputation and character have been “impugned and brought into disrepute.”
Burke said that the publication was calculated to lower his reputation which he said is crucial to his career; while adding that as a result, he “continues to suffer constant distress, humiliation, embarrassment, indignity, pain and suffering.”
Through his attorney Darren Wade, Burke is seeking general damages to the tune of $500,000,000 as well as exemplary and aggravated damages, costs and any additional order the Court deems just to grant.
In her defending affidavit in which she raises the defences of qualified privilege, justification and fair comment, Teixeira said that not only does the court in the first place lack the jurisdiction to hear the case, but that the claim itself does not constitute a claim in law.
On this point she said that the document has no valid authority to attorney as the signature to the appointment of attorney is not an original one.
Teixeira refutes Burke’s claim that the statements complained of were in anyway slanderous or defamatory.
Through her attorney Sanjeev Datadin, Teixeira is of the view that the Claimant is not entitled to any of the relief he seeks; but adds that if the Court does find him to be so entitled, then “the award should be nominal.”
